Yes, President Obama Broke His Promise On Gitmo

[Yeggo]

It still might get done by the end of his presidency in 2 (or hopefully 6) years. But it's obvious he expected it to be done by now, and it's not. There's blame to go around - Congress didn't allocate the necessary funds, but the administration didn't have a clear plan for what to do with the detainees that remained. I had hoped for it to be done by now, but in the end, there's bigger fish to fry and more important stuff going on to press too hard on this right now.

http://conversation101.squarespace.com/guantanamo-bay/2010/11/15/gitmo-than-he-bargained-for.html

[Vincardog]

1. RIGHT we can't let a little thing like unconstitutional detainment slow our progress

[Catherina]

2. Rec'd Gitmo not closed. Bagram expanded. n/t

[librechik]

3. Did he break his promise? Or is Obama the victim of a military that can't be controlled by civilian

leaders anymore? I think the latter. And it's a much more dangerous and meaningful problem.

[alanquatermass]

10. Wow! Then according to this logic George "Dubya" Bush wasn't as responsible...

-- for all of HIS military blunders either.

He will be thrilled to know that.

[librechik]

11. that was a vile response, but yes, he too was controlled

by the MIC. I hope your stay here is comfortable.

[alanquatermass]

22. Well, my stay here's running hot and cold, like anyone else's I suppose... but seriously, libre...

-- if Bush really WAS just a puppet of the MIC, then he isn't fully responsible for Iraq, Afghanistan, Gitmo, the Patriot Act, etc. is he?

I mean, doesn't that logic make sense to you?

I wasn't trying to be vile (although, on reflection, I probably did come off that way and I apologize).

But the moment we let OBAMA off the hook for the reasons that you mentioned, do we not -- by logical extension -- have to let Dubya off too?

[librechik]

23. since I'm not one who believed it was all Bush, I don't feel I have to let him off the hook

from his clear responsibility--nor do I want to let Obama off the hook. However, the power of the chief executive in regard to the military brass has been dwindling for decades. If they like the president they go wild, if they don't like the president, they also go wild. I know Obama demanded certain reasonable outcomes from his generals and they have basically told him sorry, can't be done. Do I believe they are really sorry? NO.

In the case of Bush, however independent his "generals on the ground" were, they had everything they wanted in Bush as CIC. Clueless, bloodthirsty, vengeful, militaristic without any of the gravity that combat experience sometimes lends, and easy to manipulate.

Obama, I think wanted to end the wars and close Guantanamo. Bush wanted to start wars and torture people in Guantanamo. It's nonsensical, really to talk about moral equivalencies between Obama and Bush on this issue, although it is shocking that Obama has been so ineffective in this regard.

[alanquatermass]

31. I agree on all counts. It is VERY shocking --

-- that Obama has been so ineffectual in "corralling" the U.S. military.

And you're right: With George "Dubya", we expected it. With Obama... well, I am still trying to make sense of it all.

[TheWraith]

32. None of the above. Congress fucked him.

In case anyone's forgotten, Obama barely got to dry the ink on his order closing Gitmo before Congress passed law--with the help of a huge number of Democrats--effectively banning them from closing Gitmo, by banning the use of any money to do so.

[gateley]

4. I think, like so many other issues he's tried to deal with, he didn't

realize all that it would entail to get these things accomplished. I think that's true for most presidents. Always looks and sounds so easy here on the 'outside', but then you arrive and get bogged down in all that is politics and Washington DC.

[bluestateguy]

5. A foolish promise to make in the first place

Much like Read My Lips in 1988.

Anyway, Obama didn't anticipate the political demagoguery from the other side, much like Gays in the Military in 1993 and Bill Clinton. Politicians used the issue to score cheap political points and Obama was blindsided.

In addition, the artificial deadline of one year was probably also ill-advised.

[MadHound]

28. As yes, standing firm against torture and inhumane, unconstitutional treatment is foolish

Geez, the rationalization that is starting to emerge in regards to Obama is becoming parody-like.

[Radical Activist]

6. No. He issued the order to close and Congress blocked funding to do so.

Your framing creates a false impression of Obama betraying his principles or willfully choosing to break his promise. That's untrue.

[Obamanaut]

7. If spending bills originate in the House, and Dems controlled the House

since Jan 2007, and Dems had a majority in the Senate, and a Dem was in the White House - there seems to be some validity to the complaints.

[Radical Activist]

12. So Democrats in Congress

would be primarily responsible. There's no productive purpose for the misplaced blame.

[Obamanaut]

24. And doesn't the Speaker control which bills get to the floor? It's really hard

NOT to look askance at the party in power when things go awry.

[Radical Activist]

25. Yes. The Speaker and the Party.

Not Obama. There are a lot of cowardly Democrats in Congress. Putting all the focus on Obama lets them off the hook. They need to be held accountable and that can't happen if we pretend Obama is the only elected official in Washington. We're having the same problem with the public option grudge-holders.

[piratefish08]

8. where does the money come from to keep it open?

serious question. Is it part of the defense budget?

[Radical Activist]

27. All appropriation bills start in the House.

I would assume it's the defense budget.

[de novo]

14. I don't care about the physical structure or the location. It is about the detentions without charge

We need to try ALL detainees. Sentence those that are found guilty, release those who can't be found guilty. Obama is unwilling to do that. In fact, he is claiming the power to detain for life, without charge. That is the real problem here. It isn't at all about funding.

[Radical Activist]

26. Actually, Obama is doing that.

Things have changed in the last two years. Detainees are getting trials. A new process has been established. I know some writers do their best to ignore or minimize those changes, but I believe it's important to recognize the reality that more people are getting due process.

[thetonka]

9. He made that promise to get elected

Does anyone really believe he thought he could do it?

We may all have wanted it to happen, but was it really possible? And when you think about it, don't just think about it in an ideal situation, you have to take into account the reality of the involvement of Congress and the rest of the world.

While not closing Gitmo is a big deal, making a promise that he had no chance of keeping is the bigger issue. Maybe I'm just looking for politicians that will chose honesty over saying anything to get elected.

[MrScorpio]

13. I have an idea, let's close GITMO NOW and send the detainees to Colorado!

Oh, no. Colorado doesn't want them:

http://coloradoindependent.com/19948/nimby-cries-greet-prospects-gitmo-detainees-could-be-moved-to-colorado

Leavenworth, Kansas?

Nope, not there either:

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/10/gitmo/

California?

No freaking way! You can forget, San Diego:

http://boards.ign.com/current_events_board/b5361/175989751/r175994623/

And Alcatraz too:

http://maroonedinmarin.blogspot.com/2009/01/nimby-pelosi-says-no-to-gitmo-detainees.html

How about Virginia?

Are you kidding?

http://www.mgwashington.com/index.php/news/article/gop-lawmakers-fear-terrorists-in-domestic-prisons/2608/

Texas... They love locking people up, right?

Not if you're from GITMO:

http://www.fortbendnow.com/2009/02/12/35627

As does Missouri:

http://www.missourinet.com/2009/01/26/missouris-senators-adopt-nimby-approach-to-guantanamo-detainees/

North Cackalacka:

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/NIMBY+-+Reps+seek+to+block+Gitmo+detainees-a01611806148

South Cackalacka:

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/01/not-in-my-backyard-the-gopers-complicating-obamas-gitmo-closure.php


Nobody wants them!




Wait a sec... A Pennsylvania Congressman said that he'd take them:


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/21/murtha-says-hed-guantanamo-prisoners-district/

Oh boy... Didn't Murtha pass way a year later?

Where to send them? Where?

[de novo]

15. Location isn't as important as procedure. Each detainee needs to be charged

and tried. After that, they can be sentenced or released. People keep glossing over the actual affront on civil rights, being distracted by a debate on location.

[MrScorpio]

18. Radical Activist's point that Obama's pledge was undermined by Congress is a valid one

As is the fact there is no practical solution for placing the detainees anywhere in the States when it becomes the ultimate NIMBY issue.

The President is not a dictator who can wave his hand and make things so, in spite of how correct his intent would be, IF the rest of the government and the electorate that they represent works against him.

This affront on civil rights is a shame on the Nation... It's quite myopic just to place all of the blame on Obama.

[de novo]

20. Obama only gets his share of it. The blame can go all around, but

his Administration is far from absolved in this.

He is the leader of the party that had two years of power to fix this, they failed. He owns the failure, along with the rest of the Democratic Leadership and the repug obstructionists (although they don't claim to want it closed and never ran on closing it).

[StarsInHerHair]

30. too bad this concept didn't work for getting Canadian meds

I guess States Rights come & go, like the wind. Is their refusal even legal?

[struggle4progress]

16. It's been a cute Republicon-game: block the Prez on everything, then accuse him

of not keeping his promises

I think it's lost some of its charm

[MrScorpio]

19. Bingo! nt

[AtomicKitten]

17. Congress blocked its closure and that mitigates the "broken promise."

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/05/congress-blocking-gitmo-closing-funds-in-2010/

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MadHound]

29. Hey, at least that promise has a chance of being fulfilled. The public option, well,

That promise is long gone and is not coming back.